# C_2019280EN.01002201.xml

| 19.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 280/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280/22

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 3 May 2019 — Delfly sp. z o.o. v Travel Service Polska sp. z o.o.

(Case C-356/19)

(2019/C 280/29)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Delfly sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Travel Service Polska sp. z o.o.

Questions referred

| 1. | Should Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (1) be interpreted as governing not only the scope of the obligation to pay compensation but also the manner in which that obligation is to be discharged? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Should Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (1) be interpreted as governing not only the scope of the obligation to pay compensation but also the manner in which that obligation is to be discharged?

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, can a passenger or his legal successor effectively demand the payment of the equivalent of EUR 400 in another currency, including, in particular, the national currency of the place of residence of the passenger whose flight was cancelled or delayed? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, can a passenger or his legal successor effectively demand the payment of the equivalent of EUR 400 in another currency, including, in particular, the national currency of the place of residence of the passenger whose flight was cancelled or delayed?

| 3. | If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, what criteria should be used to determine the currency in which the passenger or his legal successor may demand payment, and what exchange rate should be applied? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, what criteria should be used to determine the currency in which the passenger or his legal successor may demand payment, and what exchange rate should be applied?

| 4. | Do Article 7(1) or other provisions of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 preclude the application of provisions of national law concerning the performance of obligations which result in the dismissal of an action brought by a passenger or his legal successor on the sole ground that the claim incorrectly indicated the national currency of the passenger’s place of residence rather than the Euro in accordance with Article 7(1) of the Regulation? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Do Article 7(1) or other provisions of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 preclude the application of provisions of national law concerning the performance of obligations which result in the dismissal of an action brought by a passenger or his legal successor on the sole ground that the claim incorrectly indicated the national currency of the passenger’s place of residence rather than the Euro in accordance with Article 7(1) of the Regulation?

---

(1)  OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1.

---